You are on page 1of 12

Edinburgh Research Explorer

Mechanics of debonding in FRP-plated RC beams

Citation for published version:
Teng, JG & Chen, J-F 2009, 'Mechanics of debonding in FRP-plated RC beams' Proceedings of the ICE -
Structures and Buildings, vol 162, no. 5, pp. 335-345., 10.1680/stbu.2009.162.5.335

Digital Object Identifier (DOI):
10.1680/stbu.2009.162.5.335

Link:
Link to publication record in Edinburgh Research Explorer

Document Version:
Publisher's PDF, also known as Version of record

Published In:
Proceedings of the ICE - Structures and Buildings

General rights
Copyright for the publications made accessible via the Edinburgh Research Explorer is retained by the author(s)
and / or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing these publications that users recognise and
abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights.

Take down policy
The University of Edinburgh has made every reasonable effort to ensure that Edinburgh Research Explorer
content complies with UK legislation. If you believe that the public display of this file breaches copyright please
contact openaccess@ed.ac.uk providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and
investigate your claim.

Download date: 11. Mar. 2016

China and Environmental Accepted 24/03/2009 Engineering. UK concrete structures/rehabilitation.1680/stbu. to obtain a significant increase in the stiffness of the has become a popular technique in recent years. Failures of such FRP- plated RC beams often occur by debonding of the FRP plate from the RC beam in a number of distinct modes.1.1. PhD. INTRODUCTION most commonly unstressed. PhD. the plate may be pre- Strengthening reinforced concrete (RC) structures with tensioned to achieve a fuller use of the tensile strength of the externally bonded fibre-reinforced polymer (FRP) composites FRP plate. A RC beam The current paper provides a summary of the authors’ Adhesive layer understanding of the subject largely based on the research of the authors and their co-workers. of the FRP plate from the RC beam in a number of modes. F. For simplicity of columns through lateral confinement. FIIFC and J. Furthermore.2 The beam or to reduce the widths of cracks in the beam. 2. reclamation & renovation Mechanics of debonding in FRP-plated RC beams J. F. Teng J. G. The paper concludes with a brief discussion of future research This paper provides a summary of the current needs. Teng BEng. all discussions in this paper are presented understanding of the mechanics of debonding failures in with explicit reference to a simply supported beam (Figure 1).4–8 Despite necessary). COMMON METHODS FOR FLEXURAL AND bond behaviour between FRP and concrete are then SHEAR STRENGTHENING discussed before the mechanisms and processes of debonding failures are examined. slabs and columns as well as the ductility of RC reduce the risk of debonding failures. current knowledge of the mechanics of such debonding failures is still far from complete. presented following a brief outline of the common strengthening methods. FIIFC (a) interfacial stresses and bond behaviour between FRP and Both the flexural and shear strengths of reinforced concrete concrete (RC) beams can be substantially increased (b) classification of debonding failure modes using externally bonded fibre-reinforced polymer (FRP) (c) mechanisms and processes of debonding failures reinforcement in the forms of sheets/strips/plates (all (d ) theoretical models for debonding failures.g. Anchors technique may be used to enhance the load-carrying capacities such as U jackets 3 and fibre anchors4 may be provided to of RC beams.335 Department of Civil and Institute for Infrastructure Structural Engineering.Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers Structures and Buildings 162 October 2009 Issue SB5 Pages 335–345 J. Joint Paper 800068 Hong Kong Polytechnic Research Institute for Civil Received 12/09/2008 University. FHKIE.5. The University Keywords: beams & girders/ of Edinburgh. The and Environment. Chen BEng. G. Flexural strengthening advanced strength models for the key debonding failure FRP flexural strengthening of RC beams is commonly achieved modes are presented. pultruded) plate or a plate formed on site in a wet lay-up process. 1 The strengthening plate is 1. However. this paper is focused on RC beams strengthened with unstressed plates without additional anchors. Chen doi: 10. discussion. FRP-plated RC beams largely based on the research of but the information is also generally applicable to the authors and their co-workers.162. The paper concludes with a brief by bonding an FRP plate to its soffit (Figure 1). The FRP plate discussion of future research needs. Both the flexural and shear strengths of RC beams can be substantially increased using externally bonded FRP Existing research has shown that RC beams bonded with a reinforcement in the forms of sheets/strips/plates (all referred tension face plate often fail by debonding of the FRP plate to as plates hereafter unless specific differentiation becomes from the beam in one of several possible modes. Edinburgh. A systematic indeterminate beams by treating each segment between two classification of possible debonding failure modes is points of inflection as a simply supported beam. including the classification of debonding failure modes.2009. may be a prefabricated (e. Hong Kong.1. School of Engineering. referred to as plates for brevity). there is still considerable referred to as FRP-plated RC beams) often occur by debonding uncertainty regarding many aspects of debonding failures. The interfacial stresses and 2. MSc. RC beam with an FRP plate bonded to its soffit following issues in some detail Structures and Buildings 162 Issue SB5 Mechanics of debonding in FRP-plated RC beams Teng • Chen 335 . the paper examines the Figure 1. For simplicity. Despite numerous theoretical and experimental studies. Failures of such FRP-strengthened RC beams (also extensive existing research. Following a brief outline of Section A A FRP soffit plate the common methods for the flexural and shear strengthening of RC beams using FRP composites.

mechanical anchors may be Many analytical solutions have been presented for interfacial required at the free ends of FRP strips/sheets.2. The use of fibres debonding failure modes including the modes of concrete cover in two directions can obviously be beneficial to shear resistance. bonding FRP U jackets to both the debonded FRP wraps can continue to carry forces.9–11 although in the case of complete wraps. the FRP plate and the RC beam near the plate ends. higher interfacial In this sense. 0 ⭐ φ ⬍ 180° SPβ/φ UPβ/φ WPβ/φ Figure 2. The combination of different bonding although it is difficult to relate the magnitude of interfacial configurations. Both FRP 3. The fibres may be In an FRP-plated beam. stresses in FRP-plated beams. separation and plate end interfacial debonding which are even if strengthening for reversed cyclic loading is not required. fibres may be arranged at two different directions main components of interfacial stresses are the interfacial shear to satisfy the requirement of shear strengthening in both stress  and the interfacial normal stress  y (Figure 3). high interfacial stresses exist between orientated in such directions as to best control shear cracks. These include bonding FRP to the sides of a debonding does not directly control the ultimate load because beam only (side bonding). forms (Figure 2). with most of them being Fibre orientations and distributions Bonding scheme and notation β β ⫽ 90° SS90 US90 WS90 β 0 ⭐ β ⬍ 180° SSβ USβ WSβ φ β 0 ⭐ β ⬍ 180°. fibre orientations and fibre distributions can stresses to debonding failure in a simple direct manner. 11 sides and the soffit (U jacketing) and wrapping FRP around the whole cross-section of a beam (complete wrapping). Obviously. result in many different strengthening schemes (Figure 2). INTERFACIAL STRESSES strips and continuous sheets have been used. 0 ⭐ φ ⬍ 180° SSβ/φ USβ/φ WSβ/φ β ⫽ 90° β ⫽ 90° SP90 UP90 WP90 β 0 ⭐ β ⬍ 180° SPβ UPβ WPβ φ β 0 ⭐ β ⬍ 180°. discussed in more detail later. 12 The two Furthermore. These directions if the shear forces in a beam may be reversed under high interfacial stresses play an important role in some of the reversed cyclic loading and earthquake attacks. 2. FRPs with fibres in three directions (e. Shear strengthening Experimental evidence shows that debonding of FRP from The shear capacity of an RC beam can also be effectively concrete occurs in almost all RC beams shear-strengthened enhanced using externally bonded FRP reinforcement in various with FRP. 120o ) may also be used. Shear strengthening schemes for RC beams using externally bonded FRP reinforcement 336 Structures and Buildings 162 Issue SB5 Mechanics of debonding in FRP-plated RC beams Teng • Chen . 0o /60o / stresses mean a greater risk of debonding failure at a plate end.g. For both side bonding and U jacketing.

Existing research has shown conclusively 16–18 that stresses increase rapidly. are sufficient to illustrate the stress concentration phenomenon in the vicinity of the plate end. different from the bond behaviour of internal reinforcement. Schematic diagram of a simple pull-off test: solution of Smith and Teng. A widely studied experimentally using simple pull-off tests or longer bond length. plate. so the use of an average interfacial stress referring to the entire bond length is 4. 16 4. only part of the bond length decrease as the thickness of the adhesive layer increases. Bond behaviour between FRP and concrete has been in a pull-off test. This threshold value of the bond length is referred to as the effective bond length. 19 The discussions presented below use loaded end of the plate.20 Among concrete prism is referred to as the ultimate load or the bond the existing bond strength models. any further increase in the bond length does end. 12 as shown in Figure 4 for a (a) elevation. 12 Interfacial (b) stresses predicted by finite element analysis show a much more complex picture. The bond strength is defined herein using the tensile Chen and Teng 16 has recently been confirmed by Lu et al. starting from the be found in Chen et al. 16–18 Figure 5 shows the failure process. with both the elastic modulus and the thickness of the not lead to a further increase in the ultimate load. however. the magnitudes of these stresses bond length increases. 20 to force (or the tensile stress) in the plate instead of the average provide the most accurate predictions of test results. For a given simply supported beam the ultimate load of a pull-off test initially increases as the under transverse loading.18 In most tests on FRP-to-concrete bonded schematic diagram of the widely used simple pull-off test. A joints. BOND BEHAVIOUR inappropriate. but when the bond length reaches a increase with the distance between the support and the plate threshold value. 13 but results from the simple analytical Figure 5. to cause debonding failure in a simple 7 pull-off test is given by 6 5 Shear stress sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi pffiffiffiffiffiffi Stress: MPa 4 Efrp f c9 3 Normal stress 1  p ¼ Æw L t frp 2 1 0 where the FRP-to-concrete width ratio factor is given by 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 ⫺1 Distance from the plate end: mm sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi 2  bfrp =bc Figure 4.2. however long the bond length would be. and with the elastic modulus of the adhesive layer. Typical interfacial shear and normal stress 2 w ¼ distributions 1 þ bfrp =bc Structures and Buildings 162 Issue SB5 Mechanics of debonding in FRP-plated RC beams Teng • Chen 337 . General A good understanding of the bond behaviour between the FRP The fact that the bond strength cannot increase further once the plate and the substrate concrete is of great importance for bond length exceeds the effective bond length means that the understanding and predicting debonding failures in FRP-plated ultimate tensile strength of an FRP plate may never be reached RC beams.1. Figure 4 shows that near the plate end. RC Concrete element beam σy P Bonded plate Concrete σx τ Adhesive layer L Soffit plate (a) Figure 3. for which a bond length can always be designed for its full tensile strength if an adequate concrete cover can be provided. 12–15 is mobilised in resisting the ultimate load. (b) plan typical case. Stresses acting on a concrete element adjacent to the plate end bfrp bc P concerned with the linear elastic analysis of FRP-plated beams. can improve the ductility of the using theoretical/finite element models. Therefore. Bond strength The ultimate tensile force that can be resisted by the FRP plate Many theoretical models have been developed to predict the in a simple puff-off test before the FRP plate debonds from the bond strength of FRP-to-concrete bonded joints. both the interfacial shear and normal misleading. the model developed by strength. Chen and interfacial shear stress because the latter can be conceptually Teng’s16 bond strength model predicts that the stress in the bonded plate in MPa. 16. failure occurred by crack propagation in the concrete more detailed discussion on the bond strength test methods can adjacent to the adhesive-to-concrete interface. A simple analytical solution for interfacial stresses in such L beams has been presented by Smith and Teng. but when a long bond length is used. 4. This phenomenon is substantially the simple pull-off test (Figure 5) as the reference case. 17.

e. the precise model. and the bond length factor is given by 5c  ¼ 0 if s . 18. This is because. Classification of failure modes 4.3. 20 a slightly f c9 and bc are the concrete cylinder compressive strength (MPa) different expression was proposed for the width ratio factor w . the bond–slip behaviour of FRP-to-concrete A schematic representation of these failure modes is shown in interfaces needs to be understood and accurately modelled. and L is the but the expression given by Equation 2 can be used in the bond length (mm).24. Le 2Le 6 sf ¼ 2Gf =max with the effective bond length being defined by sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi In the above equations. DEBONDING FAILURE MODES OF FLEXURALLY 95 percentile lower bound which is suitable for use in ultimate STRENGTHENED RC BEAMS limit state design.’s original model. Figures 7 and 8. 20 conducted a thorough review of bond–slip models former type of failure. with the strong adhesives currently without a significant loss of accuracy compared with the available and with appropriate surface preparation for the precise and simplified models and is defined by the following concrete substrate. s0 ¼ 0:0195w f t . tfrp and bfrp are the elastic modulus (MPa). The interfacial fracture energy is denoted by Gf in which Efrp . the composite action between the and then proposed a set of three bond–slip models of different bonded plate and the RC beam is maintained up to failure. and width (mm) of the concrete prism respectively. Debonding failures generally occur in the concrete. plate end τ debonding failures) in four different modes τmax Bilinear model Simplified model FRP rupture Precise model (a) Concrete crushing s0 sf s (b) Figure 6.1. 1. The bilinear model is the easiest to implement.’s bond–slip models: (a) FRP rupture. s < sf sf  s0 commonly referred to as intermediate crack (IC) induced interfacial debonding (or simply IC debonding).23 RC beams. 5. should be noted that in Lu et al.21 debonding of the FRP plate from the RC beam (Figure 8). levels of sophistication based on a combination of while the latter type of failure involves a loss of this composite experimental data and meso-scale finite element simulations: action. Lu et al.427 for Æ was found by Chen above equations without any significant loss of accuracy. and sf (mm) the local slip when the local bond stress  (MPa) reduces to zero. (MPa mm).25 Debonding may also occur at or near a plate end (i. s0 (mm) the local f c9 slip at the maximum local bond stress max (MPa). A value of 0. Bond–slip behaviour A number of distinct failure modes of FRP-plated RC beams For the accurate prediction of debonding failures in FRP-plated have been observed in numerous experimental studies.315 was shown by them to provide a 5. Conventional flexural failure modes of an FRP-plated (b) crushing of compressive concrete RC beam 338 Structures and Buildings 162 Issue SB5 Mechanics of debonding in FRP-plated RC beams Teng • Chen . and ft is the concrete tensile strength (MPa). 1. debonding failures along the physical equations interfaces between the adhesive and the concrete and between s the adhesive and the FRP plate are generally not critical.22. sf 8 <1   if L > Le 3 L ¼ L where : sin if L . the simplified model and the bilinear model which is also assumed in the strength models presented in this (Figure 6).8. and Teng 16 to provide the best fit of the test data gathered by them.7. Efrp t frp pffiffiffiffiffi 4 Le ¼ pffiffiffiffiffi Gf ¼ 0:3082w f t . This debonding failure mode is 5b  ¼ max if s0 . while a value of 0. It thickness (mm) and width (mm) of the FRP plate respectively. 5a  ¼ max if s < s0 s0 Debonding may initiate at a flexural or flexural-shear crack in the high moment region and then propagates towards one of sf  s the plate ends (Figure 8(a)). s (mm) is the local slip. max ¼ 1:5w f t . paper. Figure 7. In the Lu et al. Failure of an FRP-plated RC beam may be by Both experimental and theoretical studies have been the flexural failure of the critical section (Figure 7) or by undertaken on the FRP-to-concrete bond slip behaviour.

(b) CDC debonding. A typical picture of a cover separation failure (e) is shown in Figure 10. this is not a debonding failure mode in strict terms. but this localised debonding is not yet able to propagate. (a) critical diagonal crack (CDC) debonding (Figure 8(b)) 23 (b) CDC debonding with concrete cover separation (Figure 8(c))8 (c) concrete cover separation (Figures 8(e) and 8(d))1 (d ) plate end interfacial debonding (Figure 8(f)). Failure of the concrete (d) cover is initiated by the formation of a crack near the plate end. IC debonding failures are more likely to occur in shallow beams. Debonding Critical diagonal crack A typical picture of flexural crack-induced debonding is shown (b) in Figure 9. and less prone to shear cracking which is associated with plate end debonding. generally the concrete. 5. which shows that a thin layer of concrete remained attached to the plate suggesting that failure occurred in the concrete adjacent to the adhesive-to-concrete interface. As the applied Debonding loading further increases. Debonding This is because shallow beams are more prone to flexural Debonding cracking which leads to IC debonding. In (c) general. When these stresses reach critical values. failure tends to (d) concrete cover separation. debonding starts to propagate towards one of the plate ends. the need to accommodate the large local strain concentration at the crack leads to immediate but very Figure 9. Debonding initiates at the plate end and propagates towards Figure 8. narrower than the beam section. Concrete cover separation Concrete cover separation involves crack propagation along the Debonding level of the steel tension reinforcement. FRP-plated RC beam: IC debonding localised debonding of the FRP plate from the concrete in the Structures and Buildings 162 Issue SB5 Mechanics of debonding in FRP-plated RC beams Teng • Chen 339 . 1 Based on the understanding gained from the existing studies. the tensile stresses in the plate and (a) hence the interfacial stresses between the FRP plate and the concrete near the crack also increase. The crack propagates to and then along the level of the steel tension reinforcement. (e) concrete cover separation be by concrete cover separation (i. The cover separation failure mode is a rather brittle failure mode.2.3. As the failure occurs away from the bondline.e. 5. IC debonding When a major flexural or flexural-shear crack is formed in the concrete. Debonding failure modes of RC beams bonded with the middle of the beam (Figure 8(f) and Figure 11).4. the steel bars–concrete under pure bending. as otherwise. 5. generally the nearer end where the stress gradient in the plate is higher. although it is closely associated with stress concentration near the ends of Debonding Debonding the bonded plate. resulting in the separation of the concrete cover. Plate-end interfacial debonding A debonding failure of this form is initiated by high interfacial Debonding shear and normal stresses near the end of the plate that exceed (f) the strength of the weakest element. a simple description is given below for each of the distinct debonding failure modes. mode is only likely to occur when the plate is significantly (c) CDC debonding with concrete with separation. so high local interfacial stresses between the FRP plate and the concrete are induced near the crack. IC debonding failures are more ductile than plate end debonding failures. close vicinity of the crack. This failure a soffit FRP plate: (a) IC debonding. (f) plate end interfacial debonding interface controls the failure instead). The tensile stresses released by the Flexural cracked concrete are transferred to the FRP plate and steel crack rebars.

poor workmanship and the use of inferior adhesives.27 Figure 11.10 For ease of description. (Figure 13). 26. The CDC debonding leads only to the local detachment of the plate effects of these factors can be minimised if due care is end. a major diagonal shear crack.g. a plate end near the on beams with FRP U-jackets.5. multiple shear cracks of smaller widths instead of a single major shear crack dominate the behaviour. Tensile rupture starts in the most highly stressed shear crack (critical diagonal crack. or CDC) forms and FRP strip. This treatment is conservative because recent research has shown that the existence of multiple cracks is beneficial for the development of the maximum debonding stress in the FRP. failure involves a process of sequential debonding of FRP strips starting from the most vulnerable strip In a beam with a larger amount of steel shear reinforcement. FRP-plated RC beam: concrete cover separation Figure 12. FRP-plated RC beam: plate end interfacial Eventual failure of almost all test beams occurred in one of the debonding two main failure modes: tensile rupture of the FRP and debonding of the FRP from the concrete. The local detachment owing to failure is controlled by concrete. similar to normal RC beams without FRP strengthening. The CDC failure mode is thus related to the lead to the complete separation of the FRP plate from the 340 Structures and Buildings 162 Issue SB5 Mechanics of debonding in FRP-plated RC beams Teng • Chen . DEBONDING FAILURE MODES OF SHEAR- STRENGTHENED RC BEAMS The shear failure process of FRP-strengthened RC beams involves the development of either a single major diagonal shear crack or a number of diagonal shear cracks. followed rapidly by the rupture of other FRP strips intersects the FRP plate. CDC debonding with complete FRP wraps and in some tests on beams with FRP This mode of debonding failure occurs in flexurally U-jackets. In other cases. The FRP rupture failure mode has been observed in almost all tests on beams 5. As the intersected by the critical shear crack. leading to the eventual failure of the intersected by the critical shear crack have debonded from the beam by debonding of the plate from the concrete. particularly associated with the quality of on-site application. In such beams. 6. Generally. high interfacial stresses between the plate and FRP wraps. Instead. FRP-plated RC beam: CDC debonding cover separation failure mode. the sides over the full height of the beam before tensile rupture debonding crack propagates from the CDC towards the plate failure occurs. the CDC debonding failure mode may be effectively suppressed. generally near the plate end. These include when the plate end is very close to the zero-moment location. so CDC debonding 7. OTHER ASPECTS OF DEBONDING is much less likely. cover separation takes over as the The risk of debonding is increased by a number of factors controlling debonding failure mode. the existence of a single major diagonal shear crack (the critical shear crack) is assumed whenever necessary. but the beam is able to resist higher loads until cover exercised in the application process to ensure that debonding separation occurs (Figure 8(c)). both failure modes support of a simply supported beam) and the amount of steel start with a debonding propagation process from the critical shear reinforcement is limited. In beams whose failure is by debonding of the end (Figure 12). small unevenness CDC debonding effectively moves the plate end to a new of the concrete surface may cause localised debonding of the location with a larger moment. FRP from the RC beam. In addition. Figure 10. 9. it is also common that many of the FRP strips the concrete are induced. If a flexurally strengthened beam is also shear-strengthened with U-jackets to ensure that the shear strength remains greater than the flexural strength. and cover separation then starts FRP plate but it is unlikely that such small unevenness can from this ‘new end’. In beams with complete crack widens. while the debonding failure mode has been observed strengthened beams where the plate end is located in a zone of in almost all tests on beams with FRP side strips and most tests high shear force but low moment (e.

0 ðÆflex Æaxial Æw Þ1=9 8. a CDC may form. The recent model by Teng and Yao 28 is the only model that appears to cover all the variations in plate end debonding failure modes.s M db. beam). the development of a reliable strength Structures and Buildings 162 Issue SB5 Mechanics of debonding in FRP-plated RC beams Teng • Chen 341 . and only concrete cover separation is observed (Figure 8(d)). 0:488M u. which is the bending moment side strips. The latter may be used for shear strengthening at the same time. bc =bfrp < 3 (Figure 8(b)).end M db. and Mu. and V s is the shear force carried by the similar widths. and the plate end crack that appears prior to crack propagation along the The shear debonding force Vdb. each of the plate end debonding modes (Figure 8) may become critical when the plate length or 9b Æaxial ¼ Efrp t frp =ð Ec dÞ width is varied.0 Þ =ð(EI)c.0 are the flexural stiffnesses of the CDC debonding followed by concrete cover separation (Figure cracked section with and without an FRP plate respectively. However.end and Mdb. Plate end debonding defined by Many factors control the likeliness of a particular plate end    debonding failure mode for a given plated RC beam.0 Þ example. Between these two modes. that is Given the large variety of parameters that govern plate end 11 V s ¼ Asv Esv de =sv debonding failures.s is the shear debonding force when the beam section at the plate end is not subjected to any concrete member. the plate end crack is basically vertical (Figure 8(e)).e V s are the contributions of the concrete and (Figure 8(f)) becomes the critical mode.end 7 þ ¼ 1 :0 V db. can be found from bending region. separation mode remains the controlling mode.frp and (EI)c.e < y ¼ sufficiently small compared with that of the RC beam. For 9a Æflex ¼ (EI)c. this mode the internal steel shear reinforcement to the shear capacity of rarely occurs when the RC beam and the bonded plate have the beam respectively.3 For the extreme case of a plate end in the pure (nearly) zero moment. the Es interface between the soffit plate and the RC beam becomes a more critical plane than the interface between the steel tension bars and the concrete.e. mechanical anchors can also be used to suppress that causes debonding of a plate end located in the pure FRP debonding failure so that the failure mode is changed from bending zone of a beam. care needs to be excised to avoid local failure adjacent to the anchors. Æaxial and Æw are three dimensionless parameters 8.e V s with v. the CDC may fall outside the plated region. causing a CDC debonding failure of the beam 9c Æw ¼ bc =bfrp . steel shear reinforcement per unit strain.f where Vdb. is found from debonding to rupture. DEBONDING STRENGTH MODELS FOR FLEXURALLY STRENGTHENED RC BEAMS where Æflex . However. where (EI)c. bc and d are the width and RC beam as well as the cover separation failure load so that the effective depth of the RC beam respectively.s ¼ V c þ v.s .0 is the load can still be increased following CDC debonding.f . this mode is critical if the CDC debonding Efrp tfrp is the axial rigidity per unit width of the FRP plate. at the supports in a simply supported be used in soffit plated beams to prevent plate end debonding.frp  ð(EI)c. for an RC beam with a relatively low level of internal steel shear reinforcement.1. When the distance between a plate end and the adjacent beam support (plate end distance) is very small.f is the flexural debonding moment when the beam section at the plate Figure 13.g. Mdb. Mechanical anchors and FRP U-jackets can bending moment (e.end are the plate end shear force and the plate end moment at debonding respectively. For any given plate end position. if the plate width is fy 10 V db. which is the shear force level of steel tension reinforcement becomes increasingly causing debonding of a plate end located in a region of vertical. For beams shear strengthened with FRP U-jackets and The flexural debonding moment. FRP-plated RC beams: debonding of FRP U-jackets end is not subjected to any shear force (i. As the theoretical ultimate moment of the unplated section which is plate end moves further away from the support. 8(c)) may occur.0 8 M db. the cover also the upper bound of the flexural debonding moment Mdb. Ec is failure load is lower than the shear resistance of the original the elastic modulus of concrete.f ¼ < M u. within the constant bending moment region) and Vdb. and plate end interfacial debonding where Vc and v. model is not a simple task. If the plate end distance is increased. The model caters for any combination of plate end moment and shear force by way of the following interaction curve  2  2 V db.

25 has shown this design. is given by hfrp. Chen et critical shear crack. According to Lu et al.g.e t frp wfrp 15a max ¼ 1:5w f t sfrp 15b Æ ¼ 3:41Lee =Ld where ffrp. internal steel shear reinforcement and external FRP shear reinforcement respectively. of steel stirrups and bent-up bars and Vfrp is the contribution of FRP. DEBONDING STRENGTH MODELS FOR SHEAR- STRENGTHENED RC BEAMS 10 Several approaches have been used to predict the shear 12 v. most mature and appears to be conservative for design model to be promising. v. in general. 25 explored an alternative approach that is based on rigorous definition of this effective stress. Esv and sv are the total cross-sectional area of the where Ld (mm) is the distance from the loaded section to the two legs of each stirrup. 16 leading to accurate predictions. while the other two dimensionless parameters are code approach that is discussed below. and this effective strain may be well below the yield strain of the steel shear reinforcement y . Different models differ mainly in the al. 20 was used. 10 which employed an accurate value in the FRP plate at which IC debonding is expected to bond strength model. 29 The vast where Æflex and Æw are given by Equations 9a and c majority of existing research has.27 Chen et al. the design formula in any where Vc is the contribution of concrete. The contribution of FRP is found by Two simple and reliable IC debonding strength models have truss analogy. Consequently. It may be noted that the analytical work on the behaviour of the FRP-to-concrete design code approach neglects the interactions between the interfaces between two adjacent cracks. Based on available test results. The approach 25 therefore has the most sound mechanics basis and validity of this assumption has been questioned by several is more versatile (e. 1. Teng and Yao 28 proposed that 9. occur. it is applicable to all loading conditions). referred to 16 Lee ¼ 0:228 Efrp t frp here as the effective strain. wfrp is the width of each 342 Structures and Buildings 162 Issue SB5 Mechanics of debonding in FRP-plated RC beams Teng • Chen . The most advanced model for FRP debonding failure following the design code approach is probably that All the three models mentioned above predict a stress or strain developed by Chen and Teng. but contribution is small and is ignored in this debonding strength the expression given by Equation 2 can be used in this model model. Lu et al. Vs is the contribution national code may be used. Vc and Vs may be calculated according to provisions in 8.e is the strain in the steel shear reinforcement.’s external FRP and internal steel stirrups and concrete. 26. These include the modified shear friction method. In Equation pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi 10. 24 and Lu et al.e is the average stress of the FRP intersected by the shear crack at the ultimate limit state.2. researchers. however. and further work is in progress.7 The first of steel shear reinforcement. the compression field theory.’s model7 is based on is generally assumed to be 45o for design use and the average the results of an extensive finite element study in which the stress (or effective stress) in the FRP strips intersected by the simplified bond–slip model of Lu et al. 7 adopted a slightly different expression from small contribution to the shear debonding force Vdb.e ðsin  þ cos Þ 18 V frp ¼ 2 f frp.’s model. 10 the contribution of the FRP to the shear strength of the RC beam for a general strengthening sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi scheme with FRP strips of the same width bonded on both sides Efrp of the beam (Figure 14) and with an assumed critical shear 14  dbic ¼ 0:114(4:41  Æ)max t frp crack angle of Ł ¼ 458. Two parameters are important in model 24 is a simple modification of the bond strength model determining the FRP contribution: the shear crack angle which developed by Chen and Teng.s but this that defined by Equation 2 for the width ratio factor w . adopted the design respectively. the elastic modulus and the end of the FRP plate while Lee (mm) is given by longitudinal spacing of the stirrups respectively. without any significant loss of accuracy.30–32 but the approach is the least involved for Preliminary research presented in Chen et al. It should be noted that the bonded soffit plate also makes a Again. similar to the determination of the contribution been developed by Teng et al.7 this debonding stress is given by According to Chen and Teng. IC debonding existing design codes. 16 Lu et al. the shear strength of an FRP-strengthened beam and Vu is given in the following form  1:3 17 V u ¼ V c þ V s þ V frp 13b Æt ¼ t frp =d For the prediction of Vc in design. The total shear defined by resistance of FRP-strengthened RC beams in this approach is commonly assumed to be equal to the sum of the three 13a ÆE ¼ Efrp =Ec components from concrete. various truss models and the design code approach. where Asv .e ¼ ðÆflex ÆE Æt Æw Þ1=2 strength of FRP-strengthened RC beams.

the vertical position of the critical shear crack at a given Equation 23 is applicable to both U-jackets and side strips. where zt and zb are the coordinates of the top and the bottom It becomes 1 when no gap exists between FRP strips and for ends of the effective FRP (Figure 14) continuous sheets or plates. For a shear strengthened beam with the fibres being at an angle  to the longitudinal axis of individual FRP strip (perpendicular to the fibre orientation).315 for design based on Figure 14. Equation 19 where the effective bond length Le of the FRP strips is defined reduces to hfrp. 8 < 1 if º > 1  is the angle of the inclination of fibres in the FRP to the L ¼ : sin º if º . advanced strength models for the key debonding 8 failure modes have been summarised. Structures and Buildings 162 Issue SB5 Mechanics of debonding in FRP-plated RC beams Teng • Chen 343 . 1 24a longitudinal axis of the beam (measured clockwise for the left 2 side of the beam as shown in Figure 2). The normalised maximum bond length º and the maximum bond length Lmax of the FRP strips are given by 20a zt ¼ dfrp.t Lmax 25a º¼ Le 20b zb ¼ 0:9d  ð h  dfrp Þ 8 > > hfrp. h is : for side plates 2 sin  the height of the beam and dfrp is the distance from the compression face to the lower end of the FRP. the expressions for L and w are re-written as is the horizontal spacing of FRP strips (i. The mechanisms and processes of the stress distribution factor different debonding failure modes have been examined. CONCLUDING REMARKS This paper has been concerned with the mechanics of debonding failures in RC beams strengthened in either flexure or shear with externally bonded FRP reinforcement.9d. A general shear strengthening scheme Chen and Teng’s bond strength model. The information > > f frp < sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi presented in this paper may be directly applied in the practical 22  frp.e.max is the maximum stress that can be reached in systematic classification of possible debonding failure modes the FRP intersected by the critical shear crack and Dfrp is the has been presented. sfrp the beam. the centre-to-centre distance of FRP strips along the longitudinal axis of the beam). A in which frp.e is the effective height of the FRP bonded on the web sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi  ffi pffiffiffi 2  wfrp =sfrp sin  2 24b w ¼  > 19 hfrp. Furthermore. and hfrp. When FRP is bonded to the full height of the beam sides. The number 2 appears in the denominator for side plates in Equation 25b because the FRP strip with the The FRP stress distribution at debonding failure is non-uniform maximum bond length appears at the lower end of the critical chiefly because the bond lengths of the FRP strips vary with shear crack for U-jacketing but at the middle for side bonding.t is the distance from the compression face to the 25b Lmax ¼ hfrp.t ¼ 0 for complete wrapping).t zt Tf 23 Dfrp ¼ zb d > > 2 0·9d dfrp hfrp.e ¼ 0:9d as zt ¼ 0 and zb ¼ 0.e ¼ Dfrp  frp.max 10.e < for U jackets sin  in which d f rp.e at the ultimate if the configuration of the bonded FRP is the same on the beam limit state as sides because the maximum bond length Lmax for U-jackets is twice that for side strips (see Equation 25b). The section. 8 Shear crack tip bf > 2 1  cosðº=2Þ 0·1d > < º sinðº=2Þ if º < 1 dfrp. 16 and L and w are as defined by Equations 2 and 3.e z h : 1 if º . 1 β º θ bw where the coefficient Æ has the best fit value of 0.max ¼ min Efrp pffiffiffiffiffi design of FRP strengthening systems for RC beams and serve as > : Æw L t frp f c9 > a useful basis for the future development of design provisions in design codes and guidelines. 21 f frp. yielding the lower limit value of pffiffiffi 2=2 for w .e > > top end of the FRP (thus dfrp.427 and the 95 percentile characteristic value of 0.e ¼ zb  zt 1 þ wfrp =sfrp sin  2 Note that wfrp =(sfrp sin ) is less than 1 for FRP strips with gaps. by Equation 4. Chen and Teng 10 expressed the average (or effective) actual calculated values are different for these two cases even stress in the FRP along the critical crack ffrp.

. G. (eds). 23. 20. 7.. G. Steel and Composite Structures: An International Journal. S. and CHEN J. 2007. debonding failures of FRP-plated RC beams. No. and HOLT G. ASCE. Shear capacity of FRP research. 5. CHAN W. CHEN J. deficient RC cantilever slabs using GFRP strips. LAM L. 18. 2. F. TENG J. 29. The authors would like to thank the Engineering. SMITH S. No. TENG J. Strengthening and Engineering Structures.. 2004. YAO J. Intermediate 25. FRP-strengthened RC structures. be clarified. 4. 784–791. 161–174. 183–199. finite element model for FRP sheets/plates bonded to 2008. publisher of the conference proceedings. 2005. Engineering Strength. Y. FRP-strengthened RC beams-I: Plated RC Structures: Retrofitting Beams and Slabs for Review of debonding strength models. plate. No. Interfacial stresses summarised here. G. Engineering Structures. 75–84. 2006. II: Assessment of debonding strength models. 16. 127. 11. No. G. CHEN J. 2003. 2001. 2007. SMITH S. and JIANG J. ASCE.. CHEN J. SMITH S. models for FRP sheets/plates bonded to concrete. 447–462. 17. F. understanding debonding problems in reinforced concrete 4. No. Michael Rotter. F. 6. Bond–slip Strengthened RC Structures. 2002. FRP. Engineering Structures. Journal of Structural of preloading. and TENG J.. T. 2005. GUNES O. G.. LU X. 27. Miami. Structures and range behavior of FRP-to-concrete bonded joints. No. S. 36. Shear-bending interaction in 575. 1. Within the context of monotonic loading and No. Intermediate 6. the Natural 14. Journal of the Joint Research Institute between the University of Engineering Mechanics. 231– REFERENCES 244. and TENG J. J. YAO J. Grants Council of the Hong Kong Special Administrative 1. Meso-scale Composites. Wiley. granular solids: from scientific principles to engineering Engineering Structures. J. W.. Strength model for crack debonding in FRP-strengthened RC beams: FE intermediate crack debonding in FRP-strengthened concrete analysis and strength model. (eds). CHEN J. HAO Z. the Scottish Funding Council for beams and slabs bonded with a thin plate. 99–113. 10. the existing theoretical debonding 9. G. G. No. BUYUKOZTURK O. and TENG J. Beyond the confinement of monotonic loading and strengthened RC beams: FRP debonding. and TENG J. P and JIANG J. YE L.. 26. 9. 127. 2001. No.. 1–14. 2004. G. 6 and Structures. TENG J. include debonding under cyclic and dynamic loading as well as 11. 1. F. concrete. London.. G. collaborators for their contributions to the research 13. 857–871. and CHEN J. 6. J. J. Composites for Construction. G. 7. Progress on Structural Engineering. CHEN J. 2003. TENG J. No. 2002. 77–89. YANG J. load distributions. Anchorage strength models for Conference on Structures and Granular Solids: from Scientific FRP and steel plates bonded to concrete. SERACINO R. 397–417. 2. Chichester... 5. T. TENG J.. No. Shear capacity of FRP strength models require further improvements and the effects strengthened RC beams: FRP rupture. Journal of Composites for Construction. YANG Z. 1. ASCE. 157.. Plate end debonding in FRP-plated Engineering (CICE 2006). 2. This paper was originally presented at the International 16. FRP-to-concrete bonded joints. 4. 344 Structures and Buildings 162 Issue SB5 Mechanics of debonding in FRP-plated RC beams Teng • Chen . They would also gratefully like to in RC beams bonded with a soffit plate: a finite element acknowledge the financial support provided by the Research study. Experimental study on Celebration of the 60th Birthday of Professor J.. 553–565. SHEN H. 2001. G.. and YANG J. Cambridge.. Z. 23. OEHLERS D. and CHEN J. SB1. Interfacial stresses in Edinburgh Research Partnership in Engineering and soffit-plated reinforced concrete beams. short-term behaviour. No. Advances in 22. TENG J. T. G. and LAM L. C. G. 2. pre-tensioning of the FRP Engineering. F. ZHANG J. Structures. 11. Rehabilitation of Civil Infrastructures Using FRP 21. TENG J. CRC Press/Balkema of 19. Y. and TENG J. UK. Interfacial stresses in Science Foundation of China. LU X. S. 67–70. TENG J. and SMITH S. T. WU Z. F. CAO S. 2000. of 3rd International Conference on FRP Composites in Civil 8. Journal of Principles to Engineering Applications held in honour of Structural Engineering. 2003. Engineering Construction and Building Materials. Elsevier. 2002. 417–428. YE L. experimental bond strength. and KARACA E. G. 2003. and TENG J. G.. 2004. F. 385–395. TENG J. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 12. 9–19. Proceedings of the International Conference in 18. crack induced debonding in RC beams and slabs. No. 2457–2471.. Journal of Construction and Building Materials. Stiffness and Ductility.. No. TENG J. and SERACINO R. Michael Rotter of the University of Edinburgh 17. G. 7. Debonding in RC beams shear strengthened with complete FRP wraps. F. HOLLAWAY L. Despite the extensive existing research. Retrofitting of and steel members strengthened using FRP composites. CHEN J. SMITH S. 24. G. 24. TENG J. D. G. and TENG J.. 2005. and TENG J. for permission to concrete bonded joints: effect of test methods on include the paper in this special issue. Full- (Chen J. 2. LU X. and anchorage measures require a great deal of further 10. 129. P. and WANG J. 5. Proceedings of the Mathematics (ERPem) and the Royal Society in the UK. 4. TENG J. YE L. Construction and short-term behaviour.. G. YUAN H. No. J. G. 399–406. Professor J. CHEN J. long-term durability. Z. 27–41. SMITH S. and Teng J. No. No. 615–625. F. T. applications. major issues that call for further research Building Materials. which forms part of the 15. G. Structures and Buildings.. Oxford. P and JIANG J. 7. No. many issues remain to RC beams-I: experiments. ASCE. 2005. 27. Design of FRP and Steel 5. and YAO J. 920–937. Institution of Civil Engineers. ASCE. Ooi J. T. No. 17. 2002. G. Edinburgh and Heriot-Watt University. FRP or steel plate-to- the Taylor and Francis Group. Woodhead Publishing Limited. Region. ASCE. and CHEN J. G. T... 24. Journal of Composites for members considering adjacent crack interaction. No. TENG J. 2004. assistants and beams. and YAO J. 4. The Hong Kong Polytechnic University. F. 2001. F. YAO J. Engineering Structures. Z. Construction and Building Materials. 564– 3. Composites-Part B: CRC Press/Balkema). Proceedings Construction. No. and TENG J. Interfacial stresses in plated The authors are indebted to their students.. 3. 4. SMITH S.

LU X. 173–184. 371–379. Engineering Structures. 32. 28. G. Structures and Buildings 162 Issue SB5 Mechanics of debonding in FRP-plated RC beams Teng • Chen 345 . 18–19. 29. F. Hong Kong. F. Woodhead Publishing Limited. Shear interfaces between two adjacent cracks: theoretical strengthening of reinforced concrete structures using FRP model for debonding failure. FRP-to-concrete 30. 2. LAM L. J. International Journal of composites. 29. No. Size effect of shear adjacent cracks in concrete members. 381–389.. and YAO J. Plate end debonding in FRP-plated Behaviour of FRP in Structures. SHAVE J. Structures. No. Cambridge. 3. YUAN H. 2472–2486. Papers should be 2000–5000 words long. DENTON S.uk Proceedings journals rely entirely on contributions sent in by civil engineers and related professionals. D. Proceedings of International Symposium on Bond 28. Engineering contribution of externally bonded FRP U-Jackets for RC Structures.thomastelford. 2007. beams. MOHAMED ASLI M. G.. 43. TENG J.. 6. S. with adequate illustrations and references. Progress in Structural transverse plates and internal steel stirrups. Debonding failure along 2004. G. and TENG J. Engineering Engineering and Materials. 10. YUAN H. CHEN J. P. academics and students.. 5750– Advanced Polymer Composites for Structural Applications 5778. Please visit www. Proceedings of the International Conference on Solids and Structures. please email up to 500 words to the editor at journals@ice. 2004.com/journals for author guidelines and further details. Shear strengthening of Vertical shear interaction model between external FRP RC beams using FRP composites. in Construction. 259–270. pp. and CHEN J. and PORTER A. 29. 134–143. What do you think? To comment on this paper. OEHLERS D. RC beams-II: strength model. R. and CHEN J. D. TENG J. 2005. and YE L.. pp.26. No. 2006. No. G.. and SERACINO R.org. a softening FRP-to-concrete interface between two 31. 27. Z. 2007. F. TENG J. QU Z. 2006.